πŸ“‹Provenance & Quality

Data Quality & Provenance

Every record returned by every Silicon Analysts tool β€” REST or MCP β€” carries a provenance block describing where the data came from, how confident we are in it, and when it was last refreshed. This page is the canonical reference for what those fields mean.

Where our data is least certain

We publish ranges, not false precision. These are the datapoints where our published range is widest β€” where the real number is hardest to pin down, and where input from people who work with these numbers would move us most. Confidence here is inferred from the width of the published range.

DatapointPublishedRange & confidenceSpreadWhat’s your number?
SMIC 22/28nmwafer price$2,000$1,500–$2,50050%
UMC 40/45nmwafer price$2,000$1,500–$2,50050%
Intel 7wafer price$6,500$5,000–$8,00046%
TSMC 3nm (N3)wafer price$20,000$18,000–$27,00045%
GlobalFoundries FDX (22FDX/12FDX)wafer price$3,200$2,500–$3,90044%
UMC 22/28nmwafer price$2,800$2,200–$3,40043%
GlobalFoundries 12nm (12LP/12LP+)wafer price$4,200$3,500–$4,90033%
iot-edgegross margin45%35%–50%33%

Drop your own number in any row to see how it compares to the crowd β€” input is anonymous and aggregated (individual values are never shown; the distribution unlocks at 3 contributions). Have a source? Logged-in users can suggest a reviewed correction β€” how contributions are handled.

How community data works

We invite the people who use these tools to sharpen the numbers β€” but a number nobody can trust is worse than no number. Here’s exactly how contributions are handled.

Anonymous by default

No account or email needed. We store only the value and which datapoint it’s for, to compute a community range β€” never tied to your identity, never shown individually. The range also reflects adjustments people make in our tools; you can opt out of being included at any time.

The crowd informs, we decide

Contributions never change our published numbers automatically. Sourced corrections go to a review queue we vet by hand; implausible values are bounded out, and any stray number is absorbed harmlessly into a median β€” it can’t move what we publish.

Three labels, never blurred

A number is always one of: our published estimate (vetted), the community signal (n contributors, median + confidence), or validated (a sourced correction we reviewed). We never present crowd input as fact.

Showing our confidence β€” and where the crowd disagrees β€” isn’t a weakness. It’s how we stay honest about what’s known versus estimated.

Provenance Taxonomy

Two enums classify every record: source_type (how the record was produced) and confidence_tier (how much to trust it). The type contract lives in lib/tools/types.ts.

source_type β€” how this record was produced

research

Sourced from a published external report (Morgan Stanley, TrendForce, public earnings, etc.). Direct attribution.

derived

Computed by Silicon Analysts from public inputs via a documented methodology (Monte Carlo cost models, yield equations, etc.).

computed

Pure-function output from user-supplied inputs (e.g. calculate_chip_cost results). No data lookup involved.

estimated

Analyst judgment where data is sparse or unobservable.

confidence_tier β€” qualitative confidence

high

Multiple independent sources agree; methodology is well-tested.

medium

Single authoritative source or moderate methodology uncertainty.

low

Sparse data, significant assumptions, or rapidly changing.

Why a tier and not a 0–1 number? A spurious 0.85 is worse than a reasoned "high" β€” agents will treat the number as more precise than it is. We will tighten to a numerical confidence once the methodology for computing it is documented.

Methodology & Models

The calculators run documented, industry-standard models β€” published here (and in /llms.txt for AI agents) so anyone consuming a number can assess how it was produced.

Yield models

User-selectable Poisson Y = eβˆ’AΒ·D0 and Murphy Y = ((1 βˆ’ eβˆ’AΒ·D0) / (AΒ·D0))2, where A is die area in cmΒ² and D0 is defect density in defects/cmΒ².

Defect-density maturity

D0 scales by production phase (risk / ramp / high-volume). The risk factor derives from tracked per-node early-vs-mature defect densities (e.g. TSMC N3: 0.14 early vs 0.09 mature β‰ˆ 1.56Γ—), with a documented 1.4Γ— fallback when a node lacks an early figure; ramp uses the geometric midpoint (√ratio). A small assembly-yield hit applies in immature phases (risk Γ—0.97, ramp Γ—0.99). These phase factors are SA estimates and labeled as such in the tools.

Chiplet economics

Multi-die designs use known-good-die (KGD) costing β€” default KGD yield 98.5%, packaging cost scaled +15% per die beyond the first, up to 4 dies, with assembly yield compounding per die. Optional 3D stacking compounds per-layer bond yield: Ystack = Ybond(layersβˆ’1) (US8466542), 1–8 layers, default 100% (an exact no-op). Bond-yield presets: mature 98% (ECTC 2026); ramp/early-ramp figures are SA estimates β€” Samsung's HBM4 hybrid-bonding ramp has been publicly reported near ~10%.

Manufacturing-energy adder (opt-in)

kWh per wafer start by node (~200–400 legacy up to ~800–1,500 at 3nm; ASML/imec/McKinsey public figures) Γ— regional industrial electricity rate across 7 fab regions (EIA, Taipower, KEPCO tariffs) Γ— an optional ~1.75Γ— facility-overhead multiplier (SA estimate β€” facility systems draw 50–57% of total fab electricity). Wafer price already embeds foundry energy, so the adder is a regional attribution / scenario delta, not an additional BOM line. Off by default; labeled SA est. wherever shown.

Explicit gaps β€” not modeled

Two packaging-economics quantities have no credible public figure and are deliberately not in the model: the hybrid-bonding cost delta vs micro-bump in $/wafer (only tool-throughput proxies exist β€” noted qualitatively on SoIC-class entries), and thermal-derate-to-cost rules (power-density ceilings stay qualitative). We document gaps rather than invent parameters.

Wafer price consensus

Multi-source corroborated wafer prices are rounded to $250 steps and published as bands (min/avg/max) β€” deliberate precision honesty. The what-changed feed applies a 1% significance floor on wafer pricing so rounding wobble never reads as a real movement.

Update Cadence by Dataset

Last-updated dates below are dataset-level. Per-record overrides are supported in the API; future migrations will populate them as individual chips, nodes, and packaging types refresh asynchronously. Cadence is a target β€” historical refresh history will appear on a planned /changelog page.

DatasetLast UpdatedTarget CadenceSource Types
AI Accelerators (chipSpecs)
Per-chip cost breakdowns derived from Monte Carlo models against public teardown data and analyst reports.
2026-08-16Monthly
derivedresearch
Foundry & Wafer Pricing (foundryData)
Wafer price ranges, defect density, NRE/mask-set costs, and node maturity status. Synthesized from TrendForce, Morgan Stanley, CSET, public filings.
2026-08-04Quarterly
derivedresearch
Packaging & HBM Specs (packagingData)
Per-tech packaging cost benchmarks (CoWoS-S/L, EMIB, SoIC, FC-BGA, etc.) plus HBM2 β†’ HBM4 cost-per-stack and bandwidth/capacity.
2026-09-13Monthly
derivedresearch
HBM Market Analysis (hbmData)
9 sub-tables: accelerators, specs, market share, spot prices, leading indicators, qualification feed, revenue forecast, supplier revenue, validation checks.
2026-09-13Monthly
researchderived
Supply-chain Headlines (marketPulse)
Curated supply-chain headlines with trend direction and impact analysis. Per-item dates parsed to ISO 8601 in the API.
β€”Weekly
research

Methodology Notes by Source Type

research

Research

Records attributed directly to a public external publication. Primary sources include TrendForce quarterly reports, Morgan Stanley semiconductor research, Raymond James analyst notes, CSET, IEDM proceedings, and earnings releases. Each record carries a per-row source string in addition to the structured provenance block.

derived

Derived

Records produced by a Silicon Analysts model from public inputs. Examples: per-accelerator cost breakdowns combine Epoch AI Monte Carlo models with TrendForce and Raymond James inputs; wafer price ranges synthesize multiple foundry-pricing sources with the Murphy yield model. See Semiconductor Cost Guide for the methodology in depth.

computed

Computed

Pure-function output from user-supplied inputs. The calculate_chip_cost tool is the only example today: given die dimensions and process parameters, returns an estimated chip cost. No data lookup is involved at the record level (though input defaults pull from derived wafer-pricing data β€” that data's freshness sets the ceiling on result freshness via the conservative-pick rule).

estimated

Estimated

Analyst judgment where data is sparse or unobservable. Rare today; reserved for fields like packaging cost on early-life tech where no published price exists. Always paired with low or medium.

Example: Provenance in a Tool Response

Every record across every tool carries the same shape. Below is a representative get_accelerator_costs record (truncated).

{
  "chip": "NVIDIA B200",
  "vendor": "NVIDIA",
  "processNode": "TSMC N4P",
  "estMfgCostUsd": 8500,
  "estSellPriceUsd": 30000,
  "costBreakdown": { "logicDieCostUsd": 220, "hbmCostUsd": 4200, ... },
  "provenance": {
    "last_updated":   "2026-04-07T00:00:00.000Z",
    "source_type":    "derived",
    "confidence_tier": "high",
    "dataset_version": "chipSpecs-v1.0"
  }
}

See the Developer API page for full per-tool response shapes and the /api/v1 manifest for the machine-readable contract.

Related

Immutability & validation

The record is written in pen, not pencil. Here is exactly how a number gets published, why it can't be silently changed afterward, and what happens when one turns out to be wrong.

A frozen daily ledger

Every day since 6 June 2026, the day's published values are photocopied into an append-only ledger. Those rows can never be edited or deleted β€” the database itself rejects the attempt, even from our own admin account. You can replay any past date exactly as it stood via /api/v1/snapshot?date=YYYY-MM-DD. History is never backfilled or rewritten.

Four checks before anything is published

A value must clear every gate to reach the record: (1) database bounds reject impossible values at the source; (2) a pre-freeze validator refuses to freeze an impossible value β€” the ledger takes a visible one-day gap instead of a permanent wrong number, and an operator alert fires; (3) automated agents only publish a figure when at least two independent public sources agree; (4) any human-approved edit is re-validated against the same bounds at approval time. A value that fails the freeze two days running is auto-reverted to the last frozen valid value β€” and that revert is itself logged as a public correction.

Corrections are public, never silent

When a published value later proves wrong, it is corrected in the open: an immutable brief is archived and a corrected one re-published; a frozen ledger day is annotated with the affected date range. Every correction is recorded in the public changelog below and served inline by the API for the dates it touched. Sourcing is public-only β€” no insider data β€” so every claim is checkable at its source.

Corrections changelog

Published data is immutable β€” frozen ledger days and event timelines are never edited. When a value turns out to be wrong, the correction is recorded here (and served inline by /api/v1/snapshot, /api/v1/export and /api/v1/changes for the affected dates).

hbm-pricing:Samsung, reported Nov 2025 (CY2026 supply):hbm4-contract Β· data_typemarket_datacommunity-sourced correction2026-09-15
Confirmed β†’ Estimateaffected 2026-07-28 β†’ 2026-09-15
Typing corrected from Confirmed to Estimate by owner ruling on 2026-09-15. The point was typed Confirmed as if Dealsite (2025-11-27) had printed a Samsung HBM4 price. Read at source on 2026-09-14, the original prints no dollar figure for Samsung: it reports Samsung negotiating to contract HBM4 at the same unit price as SK hynix, which the same article puts in the mid-$500s per stack. The point therefore carries SK hynix's agreed level as Samsung's negotiating target - an estimate, not a confirmed print - and its label now says so. Values unchanged (mid 15.28, range 14.6-15.3 $/GB).
hbm-pricing:2025 (12-hi per-stack baseline):hbm3e-contract-stack Β· source_namemarket_datacommunity-sourced correction2026-09-15
Chosun (Korean media) via TweakTown / Jukan (X) β†’ ν—€λŸ΄λ“œκ²½μ œ (Herald Economy)affected 2026-07-28 β†’ 2026-09-15
Attribution corrected from a relay to the original. This point credited "Chosun (Korean media) via TweakTown / Jukan (X)" and the Korean article the figure comes from was never linked. Located and read at source on 2026-09-14: ν—€λŸ΄λ“œκ²½μ œ (Herald Economy), 2025-08-07 08:22 KST; the sentence that prints the figure is now stored on the point verbatim, in Korean, with the article URL. This point takes the HBM3E $300 baseline from that sentence. Herald Economy is the earliest Korean report of these figures our verifier could read; the English relay credits Chosun as first but does not link it, and that page is not reachable by our tools. Values unchanged.
hbm-pricing:Initial quote, Aug 2025 (H1-2026 supply):hbm4-contract Β· source_namemarket_datacommunity-sourced correction2026-09-15
Chosun (Korean media) via TweakTown / Jukan (X) β†’ ν—€λŸ΄λ“œκ²½μ œ (Herald Economy)affected 2026-07-28 β†’ 2026-09-15
Attribution corrected from a relay to the original. This point credited "Chosun (Korean media) via TweakTown / Jukan (X)" and the Korean article the figure comes from was never linked. Located and read at source on 2026-09-14: ν—€λŸ΄λ“œκ²½μ œ (Herald Economy), 2025-08-07 08:22 KST; the sentence that prints the figure is now stored on the point verbatim, in Korean, with the article URL. This point takes the HBM4 $500 quote from that sentence; the original says μ•½ 70% (about 70%), which the relay rendered as 60-70%. Herald Economy is the earliest Korean report our verifier could read; the English relay credits Chosun as first but does not link it, and that page is not reachable by our tools. Values unchanged.
hbm-pricing:Q4 2025 (SK Hynix 12-hi to Nvidia):hbm3e-contract-stack Β· source_namemarket_datacommunity-sourced correction2026-09-15
Dealsite (Korean outlet) via TrendForce News β†’ λ”œμ‚¬μ΄νŠΈ (Dealsite)affected 2026-07-28 β†’ 2026-09-15
Attribution corrected from a relay to the original. This point credited "Dealsite (Korean outlet) via TrendForce News" and the Korean article the figure comes from was never linked. Located and read at source on 2026-09-14: λ”œμ‚¬μ΄νŠΈ (Dealsite), 2025-11-27 07:00 KST; the sentence that prints the figure is now stored on the point verbatim, in Korean, with the article URL. This point takes the SK hynix mid-$300s level (read as $350/stack) from that sentence. Values unchanged.
hbm-pricing:Q4 2025 (Samsung 12-hi, share-grab floor):hbm3e-contract-stack Β· source_namemarket_datacommunity-sourced correction2026-09-15
Dealsite via TrendForce News (merged with Electronics Weekly Oct 28, 2025 unattributed $300-to-$200 cut; direction corroborated by SEDaily via TrendForce) β†’ λ”œμ‚¬μ΄νŠΈ (Dealsite)affected 2026-07-28 β†’ 2026-09-15
Attribution corrected from a relay to the original. This point credited "Dealsite via TrendForce News (merged with Electronics Weekly Oct 28, 2025 unattributed $300-to-$200 cut; direction corroborated by SEDaily via TrendForce)" and the Korean article the figure comes from was never linked. Located and read at source on 2026-09-14: λ”œμ‚¬μ΄νŠΈ (Dealsite), 2025-11-27 07:00 KST; the sentence that prints the figure is now stored on the point verbatim, in Korean, with the article URL. This point takes the Samsung mid-$200s level (read as ~$245/stack, ~30% below SK hynix) from that sentence. Values unchanged.
hbm-pricing:2026 (Samsung renewal, negotiated Dec 2025):hbm3e-contract-stack Β· source_namemarket_datacommunity-sourced correction2026-09-15
Seoul Economic Daily via SammyGuru (Samsung HBM3E contract renewals) β†’ μ„œμšΈκ²½μ œ (Seoul Economic Daily)affected 2026-07-28 β†’ 2026-09-15
Attribution corrected from a relay to the original. This point credited "Seoul Economic Daily via SammyGuru (Samsung HBM3E contract renewals)" and the Korean article the figure comes from was never linked. Located and read at source on 2026-09-14: μ„œμšΈκ²½μ œ (Seoul Economic Daily), 2025-12-26 17:43 KST; the sentence that prints the figure is now stored on the point verbatim, in Korean, with the article URL. The original reports that both Samsung and SK hynix are quoting 50%+ higher prices to existing customers on HBM3E 12-Hi renewals; the relay narrowed this to Samsung, which this point's label still reflects. Values unchanged.
hbm-pricing:Agreed Nov 2025, SK Hynix (CY2026 supply):hbm4-contract Β· source_namemarket_datacommunity-sourced correction2026-09-15
Korean media via Jukan (X); TrendForce/Dealsite ('mid-$500 range') and DIGITIMES (>50% vs HBM3E) corroborate β†’ μ„œμšΈκ²½μ œ (Seoul Economic Daily)affected 2026-07-28 β†’ 2026-09-15
Attribution corrected from a relay to the original. This point credited "Korean media via Jukan (X); TrendForce/Dealsite ('mid-$500 range') and DIGITIMES (>50% vs HBM3E) corroborate" and the Korean article the figure comes from was never linked. Located and read at source on 2026-09-14: μ„œμšΈκ²½μ œ (Seoul Economic Daily), 2025-11-05 17:50 KST; the sentence that prints the figure is now stored on the point verbatim, in Korean, with the article URL. The original prints 500λ‹¬λŸ¬ μ€‘λ°˜λŒ€ (mid-$500s) and no $560; English relays had hardened it to '$560'. Our $560/stack reading of 'mid-$500s' stands as an estimate. Values unchanged.
hbm-pricing:Samsung, reported Nov 2025 (CY2026 supply):hbm4-contract Β· source_namemarket_datacommunity-sourced correction2026-09-15
The Elec / Dealsite via TrendForce, relayed by Notebookcheck; corroborated by Digitimes/Seoul Economy News β†’ λ”œμ‚¬μ΄νŠΈ (Dealsite)affected 2026-07-28 β†’ 2026-09-15
Attribution corrected from a relay to the original. This point credited "The Elec / Dealsite via TrendForce, relayed by Notebookcheck; corroborated by Digitimes/Seoul Economy News" and the Korean article the figure comes from was never linked. Located and read at source on 2026-09-14: λ”œμ‚¬μ΄νŠΈ (Dealsite), 2025-11-27 07:00 KST; the sentence that prints the figure is now stored on the point verbatim, in Korean, with the article URL. The original states no dollar figure for Samsung's HBM4: it reports Samsung negotiating to match SK hynix's unit price, which the same article puts at μ•½ 500λ‹¬λŸ¬ μ€‘λ°˜λŒ€. The relay chain presented this as Samsung's price; this point's dollar level is that SK hynix figure and its label and Confirmed typing await an owner ruling. Values unchanged.
ddr4-8gb-spot Β· spot_price_usdmemory_spotcommunity-sourced correction2026-09-14
27.015 β†’ 42.29affected 2026-08-17 β†’ 2026-09-14
Published 27.015 for as_of 2026-08-10 β€” the midpoint of a consensus band whose floor (11.53) was a single low outlier. Three subsequent reads of the same source for the same date returned 42.29 from a 42.08-42.5 band (2 independent sources, strong agreement, high confidence). The 30% delta cap was anchored to the erroneous value and blocked the correction for four weeks, and the proposal that carried the corrected reading was closed unreviewed in a backlog triage, so the value was restated by owner ruling on 2026-09-13 from that proposal's evidence. Not a market movement: the 2026-08-10 spot mark did not change, our reading of it did.
wafer-price-tsmc:5nm (2020):tsmc Β· value_midmarket_datacommunity-sourced correction2026-09-14
16000 β†’ 17000affected 2026-03-06 β†’ 2026-08-23
Recorded late. The 5nm headline sat at a flat $16,000 with no range from this dataset's creation until 2026-08-23, when it was raised to $17,000 on the finding that the flat figure understated the node's introduction price β€” the 2020 foundry-sale-price estimate for 5nm is $16,988. That change reached the published data but never reached this log, so a movement in a published figure was invisible here for a fortnight. Not a market movement: the 2020 price did not change, our reading of it did.
wafer-price-tsmc:5nm (2020):tsmc Β· value_midmarket_datacommunity-sourced correction2026-09-14
17000 β†’ 16500affected 2026-08-23 β†’ 2026-09-14
Range-shape correction, not a new price view. The 2026-08-23 change set the headline equal to the top of its own range, so a $16,000-$17,000 range published $17,000 as its central figure. The two public sources for this node disagree β€” $16,000 from a reported 2022 price table, $16,988 from a 2020 foundry-sale-price estimate β€” and the 7nm point on this same chart settles that same disagreement at the midpoint of the two. The headline moves to the midpoint; the published range is unchanged. The attribution, which named only one of the two sources, now names both.
hbm_cost_per_gb:gpu-ai Β· value_numbenchmark_observationannotation on frozen history2026-09-14
15 β†’ β€”affected 2026-07-19 β†’ 2026-09-14
Left published, it would also have been the only in-window observation used on 2026-10-02 to grade nine of our own hbm3e Q3 2026 forecast vintages β€” scoring the model against the number the model was built from. The row is retained unchanged with review_status rejected; no market value is asserted in its place.
hbm-pricing:2026 (proj., superseded):hbm3e-contract Β· value_midmarket_datacommunity-sourced correction2026-09-14
15 β†’ 10affected 2026-09-06 β†’ 2026-09-07
Reverted an automated update that rested on a quoted source sentence which does not appear in the article it cited. This point is a preserved superseded forecast β€” the Nov-2025 projection of a 2026 HBM3E price decline, kept on the chart precisely because it was reversed weeks later by the Dec-2025 supply-price increases. The automated update replaced its values (band 10-12 to 13-17) with the post-reversal level while leaving the label and the explanatory note describing the reversal in place, so the point contradicted itself. Values returned to the preserved projection. Not a market movement: nothing about 2026 pricing changed on 2026-09-06.
hbm-pricing:2026 (proj., superseded):hbm3e-contract Β· source_namemarket_datacommunity-sourced correction2026-09-14
TrendForce β†’ Goldman Sachs memory report, as quoted by Jukan (@Jukanlosreve) on Xaffected 2026-09-06 β†’ 2026-09-07
Attribution correction accompanying the value revert: the same automated update re-attributed this preserved projection to TrendForce on the strength of a quoted sentence not present in the cited article. The projection is Goldman Sachs' and the attribution has been restored. No TrendForce publication stated the figure that was briefly shown here.
HBM4 Β· capacityhbm_specs_refcommunity-sourced correction2026-09-14
48 GB β†’ 36 GBaffected 2026-04-07 β†’ 2026-09-14
The HBM4 reference row carried the 16-Hi stack capacity (48 GB, a 2027 part) while every HBM4 figure published alongside it β€” Rubin at 8 stacks = 288 GB, the per-stack HBM4 supply prices, the July 2026 pricing rebuild β€” is on the 12-Hi 36 GB part that ships in 2026. Relabelled to 36 GB; the per-stack cost estimate ($500) is unchanged, so its implied cost per GB rises from $10.42 to $13.89, in line with a logic-base-die part costing more per GB than HBM3e. Not a market movement: the part did not change, our label for it did.
tsmc-12 Β· tech_node_classfab_registryannotation on frozen history2026-09-12
5nm Class (7nm + 5nm, 75/25) β†’ Mature (>=40nm)affected 2026-02-23 β†’ 2026-09-12
TSMC's FY2025 Form 20-F lists Fab 12's most advanced technology for volume production as 40 nm at 2025 year-end, and the column is maintained: the same table read 7 nm for FY2018-20, 5 nm for FY2021 and 3 nm for FY2022-23 while each node piloted at this fab, then 40 nm in the FY2024 and FY2025 filings. This record published 75 kWSPM of N7 and 25 kWSPM of N5 here for 2024-2028 that TSMC does not count as volume production at this site. Reclassified to mature; the 100 kWSPM total is unchanged and is now marked an estimate. Why the filing says 40 rather than 28 or 16 is not explained by TSMC and is recorded as filed.
tsmc-14 Β· tech_node_classfab_registryannotation on frozen history2026-09-12
5nm Class (7nm + 5nm, 75/25) β†’ 10-16nm Classaffected 2026-02-23 β†’ 2026-09-12
TSMC's FY2025 Form 20-F lists Fab 14's most advanced technology for volume production as 16 nm β€” and has in every filing since FY2018. This record published 90 kWSPM of N7 and 30 kWSPM of N5 here for 2024-2028 at a fab TSMC has never listed below 16 nm. Reclassified to the 16 nm class; the 120 kWSPM total is unchanged and is now marked an estimate. The start year was also wrong: commercial production began in 2004, not 2014.
tsmc-15 Β· tech_node_classfab_registryannotation on frozen history2026-09-12
3nm Class (7nm + 5nm + 3nm) β†’ 7nm Classaffected 2026-02-23 β†’ 2026-09-12
TSMC's FY2025 Form 20-F lists Fab 15's most advanced technology for volume production as 7 nm β€” and has in every filing since FY2018. This record published 19.5 kWSPM of N3 and 24.7 kWSPM of N5 here from 2025 (5.2 of N3 in 2024) that TSMC does not count as volume production at this site at 2025 year-end; the note claiming Fab 15B had been fully converted to N3 cited no source and is withdrawn. All 130 kWSPM now reports as N7. With N7 attributed to this fab alone the fab-side N7 total (130) sits below the 208-239 kWSPM that TSMC's 2Q26 results imply, which points at the unsourced fab total rather than at the filing.
amkor-arizona Β· tech_node_classfab_registryannotation on frozen history2026-09-12
2.5D β†’ Advanced Packagingaffected 2026-07-12 β†’ 2026-09-12
Amkor Peoria Fab runs 3 packaging technologies (2.5D, FcBGA, SiP) and publishes no per-technology split. Its whole capacity was published as 2.5D alone, which attributed all three lines to one process. It now reports as Advanced Packaging, unattributed, until a sourced split exists. The capacity figure itself is unchanged (25 k units/month in 2028).
amkor-korea Β· tech_node_classfab_registryannotation on frozen history2026-09-12
2.5D β†’ Advanced Packagingaffected 2026-07-12 β†’ 2026-09-12
Amkor Incheon Fab runs 3 packaging technologies (2.5D, FcBGA, SiP) and publishes no per-technology split. Its whole capacity was published as 2.5D alone, which attributed all three lines to one process. It now reports as Advanced Packaging, unattributed, until a sourced split exists. The capacity figure itself is unchanged (22 k units/month in 2026).